• 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: NYPD officer in Eric Garner chokehold death not indicted by Staten Island grand j

Obviously you claim you were. Tell us what happened. There has to be some basis for your incessantly claiming the GJ heard all relevant evidence and witnesses. What is that basis?
I have not foolishly countered their decision. You have.

I believe I may have asked you this already. Are you making allegations of corruption against the district attorney or the prosecutor? Do you believe the police intimidated members of the grand jury? Make your claims and present your evidence.

In the mean time I will continue to accept the grand juries decision.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

.... I don't know, it increasingly seems like the police are a part of that criminal class
I don't know. I have known a few over the years. The ones I met were pretty impressive people. Of course like attracts like. :)
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

1) No one is talking about nationalizing the police. Not even close.
Just watch. Already we are seeing increased meddling by the Justice Department into local crimes.

2) Plenty of nations don't use grand juries, and have not collapsed into tyranny. (Unless you have a patently ridiculously low barriers for your definition of "tyranny.")
I doubt you can make that case. Tyranny occurs when the levers of government power reside in a single office or individual. If a prosecutor can bring serious charges against anyone for any reason without the brakes of overwatching citizens then the conditions for tyranny are set. And you will never see nor hear of the coercion, of the bullying, and of people broken by unfair arrest and trial. Whether one wins or loses trials are rending things. Putting that power in the hands of one person is tyrannical.

"We cannot always see the ones who are broken by trials for crimes they never committed. I brought a lawsuit and won. But it cost me dearly. It costs the state nothing."

1) I have no interest whatsoever in your personal business.
It is so easy to miss the points one chooses not to see.
2) Yes, it does cost the State to pursue cases in court. Prosecutors don't have unlimited budgets; cities don't have unlimited resources.
No. It costs the state nothing. The prosecutor is not paying out of pocket. The state feels no pain. Only the taxpayers feel the pain.

"Be careful what you wish for. Tyranny nearly always is included in your bargain."

From what I can tell, you probably think Chipotle is an instrument of tyranny. :mrgreen:

Meanwhile, the real tyranny right now seems to be that police can kill citizens with impunity, even when the individual is unarmed, not violent, resisting arrest by waving his arms, and a suspect in a non-violent offense.
No one can prevent you from being on the wrong side of an issue. Least of all me.

There was no tyranny in that particular death unless it was the tyranny of too much fried chicken and gravy. Police did not kill him with impunity. He died because he was a sick, out of shape fatass who resisted arrest.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

It doesn't have to be the same. Regardless if the police proceed to search, detain or arrest, you do not resist. She resisted the moment she was asked to step outside the vehicle.



If you're indicted and it is mentioned that you tried to flee the seen of a crime, it can potentially be bad.



She was informed she was being detained. She was ordered to step outside the vehicle. She refused. How is that not resisting? They had to break her window to get her out of the car...



That's a mistake. The window is actually supposed to be rolled 1/4th of the way. Open enough so that you can have a conversation and pass documents through the window. If the window is not down far enough, the police cannot be able to see if there are any weapons concealed. So yes, it is about their safety too. They're still not allowed to search inside your car.

However, just imagine how much simpler it all would have been if she would have just rolled her window down...

"Resisting" is just a word. "Resisting" is not a crime. Resisting police is no a crime. "Resisting arrest" is a crime.

As I stated, I have no complaint with any of it other than when the officer said she was resisting arrest.

Refusing to step out of the car can be declared (or concocted) into numerous offenses depending on laws. "Failure to comply with a lawful police order." "Interfering the police."
BUT there can be NO resisting arrest until a person is informed they are under arrest. That is obvious.

What I am complaining of it misusage of the word "resisting" and specifically "resisting arrest." Resistance of itself is not illegal. If a police officer begins assault me, that is not a declaration that I am being arrested. Rather, it is the fact that I am being assaulted.

That is why so many times I have asked for anything to show he was informed that he was under arrest. Or at least SOME command. I heard none. Nor have any been reported.

Not only could he tell the police "don't touch me," and "leave me alone," he could legally tell them "go fuck yourselves" or anything else but a physical threat.

It was impossible for him to resist arrest unless informed he was under arrest. It was impossible for him to have been resisting any command, unless he had been given one.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Just watch. Already we are seeing increased meddling by the Justice Department into local crimes.


I doubt you can make that case. Tyranny occurs when the levers of government power reside in a single office or individual. If a prosecutor can bring serious charges against anyone for any reason without the brakes of overwatching citizens then the conditions for tyranny are set. And you will never see nor hear of the coercion, of the bullying, and of people broken by unfair arrest and trial. Whether one wins or loses trials are rending things. Putting that power in the hands of one person is tyrannical.

"We cannot always see the ones who are broken by trials for crimes they never committed. I brought a lawsuit and won. But it cost me dearly. It costs the state nothing."


It is so easy to miss the points one chooses not to see.

No. It costs the state nothing. The prosecutor is not paying out of pocket. The state feels no pain. Only the taxpayers feel the pain.

"Be careful what you wish for. Tyranny nearly always is included in your bargain."


No one can prevent you from being on the wrong side of an issue. Least of all me.

There was no tyranny in that particular death unless it was the tyranny of too much fried chicken and gravy. Police did not kill him with impunity. He died because he was a sick, out of shape fatass who resisted arrest.

There is nothing to show he "resisted arrest."

He died because of the way he was assaulted.

He sneers at Gardener's weight because a hater's gotta hate. The friend chicken and gravy thing is his tossing his tad of racism into it. There's a lot of racist jokes about African-Americans and fried chicken. I'm certain he knows many of them. Surprised he didn't toss watermelon into it.

We saw many a buffet line in NYC - didn't see chicken and gravy once.
 
Re: NYPD officer in Eric Garner chokehold death not indicted by Staten Island grand j

I have not foolishly countered their decision. You have.

I believe I may have asked you this already. Are you making allegations of corruption against the district attorney or the prosecutor? Do you believe the police intimidated members of the grand jury? Make your claims and present your evidence.

In the mean time I will continue to accept the grand juries decision.

You are the one declaring the grand jury was fully informed of all evidence and witnesses - when you don't know jack [/FONT] what the grand jury saw or heard. Therefore, you continually declaring the heard everything they should have is something you make up entirely out of thin air - while declaring it known fact.

Anyone in the criminal justice system or law enforcement understands no one is going to be indicted that the prosecutor doesn't want indicted.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

1) No one is talking about nationalizing the police. Not even close.
2) Plenty of nations don't use grand juries, and have not collapsed into tyranny. (Unless you have a patently ridiculously low barriers for your definition of "tyranny.")



1) I have no interest whatsoever in your personal business.
2) Yes, it does cost the State to pursue cases in court. Prosecutors don't have unlimited budgets; cities don't have unlimited resources.



From what I can tell, you probably think Chipotle is an instrument of tyranny. :mrgreen:

Meanwhile, the real tyranny right now seems to be that police can kill citizens with impunity, even when the individual is unarmed, not violent, resisting arrest by waving his arms, and a suspect in a non-violent offense.

Misterveritis thinks it's tyranny when his shoe comes undone.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

"Resisting" is just a word. "Resisting" is not a crime. Resisting police is no a crime. "Resisting arrest" is a crime.

As I stated, I have no complaint with any of it other than when the officer said she was resisting arrest.

Refusing to step out of the car can be declared (or concocted) into numerous offenses depending on laws. "Failure to comply with a lawful police order." "Interfering the police."
BUT there can be NO resisting arrest until a person is informed they are under arrest. That is obvious.

What I am complaining of it misusage of the word "resisting" and specifically "resisting arrest." Resistance of itself is not illegal. If a police officer begins assault me, that is not a declaration that I am being arrested. Rather, it is the fact that I am being assaulted.

That is why so many times I have asked for anything to show he was informed that he was under arrest. Or at least SOME command. I heard none. Nor have any been reported.

Not only could he tell the police "don't touch me," and "leave me alone," he could legally tell them "go fuck yourselves" or anything else but a physical threat.

It was impossible for him to resist arrest unless informed he was under arrest. It was impossible for him to have been resisting any command, unless he had been given one.

Winner winner chicken dinner
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

My God....is that photo before or after or before Garner said he could breath? What exactly are you defending here, MMC?

I would think it was Before. As the GJ noted in the Video that after Garner said he couldn't breathe. Then the Cop gave up the chokehold. After the first time of him saying it.


The Truth!
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

That's a question for the mayor and the city council

Not the police force whose job it is to enforce those laws on the books
It has been said he was selling cigarettes illegally but there is no evidence of that in the video, nor why they were arresting him at all. Of course I could be wrong.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Grant, it was not illegal. It was unauthorized.
Potatoes potatoes. The man said "It is never my intention to harm anyone", yet it is quite clear he did and he did it deliberately. You don't sneak up behind a person, put him in a choke-hold, bring him crashing to the sidewalk and then claim it was not his intent to harm anyone. Of course that was his intent. He should have said, "It was never my intention to kill anyone", and many would have understood that.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Dood resists arrest. Dood is arrested. SOP. You want to see these kinds of needless deaths stop?1-stop committing criminal acts and 2-stop thinking you have this right to NOT comply with law enforcement. Brown would be alive today if he had simply said, sorry man...we'll get out of the middle of the road. Garner would have been alive today had he said OK...but Im fighting it in court. I dont know...maybe he felt like 31 was not going to be his lucky number.

What criminal act was he committing?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Fortunately it is not the one we have. The grand jury is comprised of citizens from the neighborhood where the trial is likely to take place. They are civilian citizens. They are independent of the prosecutor. They evaluate the evidence the prosecutor has, hears testimony from witnesses and then decides whether or not to charge. Where I live we use the property tax and voter registrations records as the grand jury pool. Anyone can be called and everyone who is called must present themselves for selection. Grand Juries here typically meet for one or two days. A few will meet several times over a two to three week period. Everything is done in secret.

It is a final brake against tyranny at the local level.

If you trust the wisdom of the people all that much, how do you explain the last Presidential results?
 
Re: NYPD officer in Eric Garner chokehold death not indicted by Staten Island grand j

Wonder all you want. When you join the mob you get what the mob gets. It always comes with a price. How are you any different than the looters and arsonists in Ferguson? Burning on emotion instead of reason still leaves you burned.

Where do you want to take this? Shall we have Eric Holder sitting on on every grand jury throughout the land to make sure the citizens see what Eric Holder wants him to see? When did you lose faith in the American citizen?

Or are you arguing that the district attorney is corrupt? Other than your feelings what is your evidence? Wait. You don't need evidence anymore. You now have feelings and they trump reason every time.

I wish you would reconsider. Your way is guaranteed to local tyranny. It will be a quiet tyranny. You won't see the lives wrecked by phony trials. But it will still happen. It always does.
Neither of us is part of a mob or promoting tyranny. We just have a difference of opinion.

We can both have concern over phoney trials, just as we can have concern over Grand Jury decisions. Juries have been wrong before, and calling them "Grand" shouldn't make much difference.
 
Re: NYPD officer in Eric Garner chokehold death not indicted by Staten Island grand j

Think a little deeper. Why was he there? What was he doing and what made it profitable? Why did others object? Why did the city make a repeat offense a felony? He was a repeat offender, at least from the allegations online. Why would it be a felony to sell cigarettes without a tax stamp? Who made those laws? Who hired so many police to enforce their laws?

Liberalism ran amok. It always causes misery for most. And death to a few. If you want to solve this problem create a single sales tax rate for everything. No exceptions.
I can agree with much of that but am also concerned about gratuitous police violence. I would have the same opinion if he was a shoplifter or a pickpocket.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Where do you see tyranny in the video? You are irrational. It is a shame. It happens.
It was you who raised the question of tyranny but i don;t see any tyranny in the actions of Eric Garner. I'll support the police in the performance of their duty but have also seen them at the Berlin Wall, and have run into their corruption in other countries.

"Who will watch the watchmen?" is a translation of the phrase "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" made famous by the Roman Poet Juvenal in his satires".

It's obviously not a new problem.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

What criminal act was he committing?
According to the officer he was being detained for suspicion of selling untaxed cigarettes (a crime he had a substantial history of committing in the past).
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

According to the officer he was being detained for suspicion of selling untaxed cigarettes (a crime he had a substantial history of committing in the past).
Detained on suspicion? Despite no evidence that this had actually occurred?

There should be some discretion used in these cases without having several officers arrive to arrest someone on suspicions that maybe he sold one or more cigarettes. This is literal overkill.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Detained on suspicion? Despite no evidence that this had actually occurred?

There should be some discretion used in these cases without having several officers arrive to arrest someone on suspicions that maybe he sold one or more cigarettes. This is literal overkill.
Ask the officer. What we know and the evidence clearly shows is that the officer announced his intent and Garner resisted. Thats going to result in an arrest every time. But be honest. That HAS to be one of the tamest take downs you have witnessed of a subject twice the officers size and resisting arrest. He swung his arms and refused to comply, another officer got him around the neck and shoulders and in 8 seconds he was down and that same officer held his head and shoulders down while he was cuffed.

He is dead because he refused to comply with the law enforcement officer. I dont know if he is guilty or not...but I DO know he had some 30 prior arrests, and many of them were felonies. If he wasnt guilty, he should have gone to court. Its not like he didnt know the way there.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Ask the officer. What we know and the evidence clearly shows is that the officer announced his intent and Garner resisted. Thats going to result in an arrest every time. But be honest. That HAS to be one of the tamest take downs you have witnessed of a subject twice the officers size and resisting arrest. He swung his arms and refused to comply, another officer got him around the neck and shoulders and in 8 seconds he was down and that same officer held his head and shoulders down while he was cuffed.

He is dead because he refused to comply with the law enforcement officer. I dont know if he is guilty or not...but I DO know he had some 30 prior arrests, and many of them were felonies. If he wasnt guilty, he should have gone to court. Its not like he didnt know the way there.

Not one person, ever, has presented anything showing he was given any police command or that he was ever informed he was under arrest.

There is no such thing as the crime of "resisting." Resisting what? Being chocked, thrown to the ground, crushed, head pressed into the concrete?

It was a brutal, vicious and deadly takedown. Nothing tame about it. Claiming that's "tame" is absurd, truly absurd.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

According to the officer he was being detained for suspicion of selling untaxed cigarettes (a crime he had a substantial history of committing in the past).

There is no such thing as "resisting arrest" until a person is told s/he is under arrest. Being detained is not the same as being arrested either.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Not one person, ever, has presented anything showing he was given any police command or that he was ever informed he was under arrest.

There is no such thing as the crime of "resisting." Resisting what? Being chocked, thrown to the ground, crushed, head pressed into the concrete?

It was a brutal, vicious and deadly takedown. Nothing tame about it. Claiming that's "tame" is absurd, truly absurd.
:lamo

Good lord....

If dood wasnt 200+ pounds overweight and had spent some time on the stairmaster, no one would have cared because he would be alive and well and probably on arrest citation # 37, instead of just #31.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

I dont know if he is guilty or not...but I DO know he had some 30 prior arrests, and many of them were felonies. If he wasnt guilty, he should have gone to court. Its not like he didnt know the way there.

Everyone of you police worshippers point to Garner's record - and ABSOLUTELY NONE OF YOU - have done so for the officer of the chock hold.

Daniel Pantaleo

Daniel Pantaleo is a New York City Police Department officer who at the time of Garner's death was 29 years old, and living in Eltingville, Staten Island.[26] Pantaleo was the subject of two civil rights lawsuits in 2013 where plaintiffs accused Pantaleo of falsely arresting them and abusing them.[27] In one of the cases, Pantaleo and other officers ordered two black men to strip naked on the street for a search and the charges against the men were dismissed.

Death of Eric Garner - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Mostly agree, but the absurd zero tolerance policies are more right wing authoritarian than they are "progressive." The seem regressive to me.

They're a trademark of both but in todays' western world, and especially in the US from my experience, the 0 tolerance mentality comes from the leftist "progressive" people whom as I said before, are not really progressive. They are just commandeering the word to describe themselves but they're very twisted people with a huge talent for mental gymnastics.

What you say about the right wing authoritarian mentality is indeed true in countries like Iran and the arab world.

There is a difference in the way these 2 groups operate. The leftists, the "progressives" are persuading people to be like them, to join their little cult by offering them "salvation". "Be like us, think like us and you're a good person, you're not evil. you're tolerant and good and open-minded and all that good stuff, but you have to think like us, believe exactly like we believe because we know what is right and true and good and everyone else who doesn't comform is the evil enemy! "
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

:lamo

Good lord....

If dood wasnt 200+ pounds overweight and had spent some time on the stairmaster, no one would have cared because he would be alive and well and probably on arrest citation # 37, instead of just #31.

Cite your medical credentials.

The city medical examiner has ruled the death of Eric Garner, the 43-year-old father whose death in police custody sparked national outrage, a homicide, saying a chokehold killed him.
The medical examiner said compression of the neck and chest, along with Garner's positioning on the ground while being restrained by police during the July 17 stop on Staten Island, caused his death.
 
Back
Top Bottom