• 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

My in-laws sold their house in 1997 for about $550,000. Now they're selling there for almost $900,000.Makes me wish they'd hung on to it for a few more years.

I miss some things about Jersey, but not the prices (and the taxes).



Mahwah has relatively "low" taxes, still high though, 15-20k on a ,million dollar home.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Mahwah has relatively "low" taxes, still high though, 15-20k on a ,million dollar home.

True. Morristown still has reasonable (by NJ standards) tax rates as well (my family is also long gone from there).

I prefer NH with no income tax, no sales tax, and $10,000 a year property taxes on a $550,000 home.:mrgreen:
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

True. Morristown still has reasonable (by NJ standards) tax rates as well (my family is also long gone from there).

I prefer NH with no income tax, no sales tax, and $10,000 a year property taxes on a $550,000 home.:mrgreen:



I'm south of morristown, famous horse place, near trump's golf course.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Not a what if. It is a the missing piece that links the officers standing with hands crossed to the officers attempting to arrest Garner. My point was originally in regard to the claim that he was being arrested for no reason which is a simple assumption since the critical video to establish that either does not exist or was edited out of the video before posting it.

Let me correct that for you:

What if..... it is the missing piece that links the officers standing with hands crossed to the officers attempting to arrest Garner.

So you have evidence that there is a considerable amount of time elapsed? Correct?

My point was originally in regard to the claim that he was being arrested for no reason which is a simple assumption since the critical video to establish that either does not exist or was edited out of the video before posting it.

No one said he was being arrested for no reason. As a matter of fact, it's been established the cops approached him over some 3 quarter cigarettes and then put him in a chokehold because he talked a little too loud for their liking. That's the reason this thread has gone on for 176 pages. We have people like you who thinks this was a reasonable response to a 40 year old smokes peddler and people like me who see it as an assault/manslaughter/murder (depends on the person) by some weak cops. :shrug: Keep at the suppositions though. It's fun to know you haven't moved up from what if.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Let me correct that for you:



So you have evidence that there is a considerable amount of time elapsed? Correct?



No one said he was being arrested for no reason. As a matter of fact, it's been established the cops approached him over some 3 quarter cigarettes and then put him in a chokehold because he talked a little too loud for their liking. That's the reason this thread has gone on for 176 pages. We have people like you who thinks this was a reasonable response to a 40 year old smokes peddler and people like me who see it as an assault/manslaughter/murder (depends on the person) by some weak cops. :shrug: Keep at the suppositions though. It's fun to know you haven't moved up from what if.

Can we just saw time and assume you won't ever find any cops actions justified?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

I don't "argue" anything. I posted a fact. An NYPD officer putting a suspect in a chokehold is not illegal. It was banned by the NYPD years ago. That doesn't mean it's "illegal". If the NYPD banned beards on their officers, you don't draw the conclusion that beards are now illegal in NY. Pay attention to the posts.

Quick question: Imagine your significant other is getting a little loud at a bar. A few bouncers don't like his loudness and get in his face. A short exchange of words happens, then one of them, in order to subdue him puts him in a similar chokehold and 5 others jump on him to hold him down and tie him up.

Is it assault?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Can we just saw time and assume you won't ever find any cops actions justified?

Utter nonsense, want me to prove you wrong like I did in the evolution thread? ;)
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Quick question: Imagine your significant other is getting a little loud at a bar. A few bouncers don't like his loudness and get in his face. A short exchange of words happens, then one of them, in order to subdue him puts him in a similar chokehold and 5 others jump on him to hold him down and tie him up.

Is it assault?

I would think so. I don't think it's legal for bouncers to assault patrons except in the case of self-defense (or perhaps coming to the defense of others). Why do you ask?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

I would think so. I don't think it's legal for bouncers to assault patrons except in the case of self-defense (or perhaps coming to the defense of others). Why do you ask?

I ask to make a point.

That point being: In similar a situation, your significant other's inebriation level didn't make a difference as to what you'd label the actions taken by the police. Yet, you're justifying the police doing the same thing to a perfectly sober person over cigarettes. In both cases, figures of authority attacked a person because they felt threatened. In both cases the person did something the figures of authority didn't like. In both cases the authorities did something they're not allowed to do for one reason or another. However, clear that the only difference here, at least for you, is a cop's badge. That's a pretty dangerous way of thinking for someone who claims to be a libertarian.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

I ask to make a point.

That point being: In similar a situation, your significant other's inebriation level didn't make a difference as to what you'd label the actions taken by the police. Yet, you're justifying the police doing the same thing to a perfectly sober person over cigarettes. In both cases, figures of authority attacked a person because they felt threatened. In both cases the person did something the figures of authority didn't like. In both cases the authorities did something they're not allowed to do for one reason or another. However, clear that the only difference here, at least for you, is a cop's badge. That's a pretty dangerous way of thinking for someone who claims to be a libertarian.

Wut? This is the second time in this thread you've attributed posts to me I never made. I never justified the police doing anything in this thread. Never.

Stop it right now.

The post I made to Vesper that got you worked up was clarifying that the chokehold rule for police on duty is not an illegal versus legal thing. Chokeholds by NYPD police are not illegal by definition of the law. They were banned as a practice by the NYPD. You should not have taken that as I'm supporting the NYPD actions and something about a "cop's badge".

It infuriates me when people make assumptions about my opinions on what happened based on nothing. You're better than this. Please stop.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Quick question: Imagine your significant other is getting a little loud at a bar. A few bouncers don't like his loudness and get in his face. A short exchange of words happens, then one of them, in order to subdue him puts him in a similar chokehold and 5 others jump on him to hold him down and tie him up.

Is it assault?

This is a false parallel. Bouncers cannot legally initiate the use of force. The police can. Assuming the patron didn't throw the first punch the bouncers - even if it's a 1 on 1 - are mostly likely guilty. The police are most likely not.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Then you would have no problem if someone jumped your wife or mother from behind with a chock hold, threw her to the concrete, while another man shoved her head into concrete and the full weigh of a man on her back - because that's tame and there is no danger of it.

You know that by your medical expertise and having participated in the autopsy. :roll:

Your end of your sentence is your cheering his death, nothing else.
If they were resisting arrest? Nah. Well...OK...because it would be personal it would probably piss me off. BUT...if my wife or mother had been arrested 30 times before for varying charges, I'd like to think that make me understand things just a little bit better.

I know that by reading the preliminary findings released by the medical examiner that stated that as fact. I'd love to see the actual autopsy...yes.

The emotional appeal is a lousy debate tactic Joko. Ironically YOU are acting more personally invested in this than his family is.

NOT surprisingly, you and Hatuey are employing the same tactics. Its more of that whole minds thinking alike thing.
 
Last edited:
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Wut? This is the second time in this thread you've attributed posts to me I never made. I never justified the police doing anything in this thread. Never.

Eh, the last time I talked to you in this thread I didn't attribute anything to you...

Stop it right now.

The post I made to Vesper that got you worked up was clarifying that the chokehold rule for police on duty is not an illegal versus legal thing. Chokeholds by NYPD police are not illegal by definition of the law. They were banned as a practice by the NYPD. You should not have taken that as I'm supporting the NYPD actions and something about a "cop's badge".

It infuriates me when people make assumptions about my opinions on what happened based on nothing. You're better than this. Please stop.

If all that changes is physical setting and the characters, the chokehold is considered part of an assault and illegal action. If the setting stays the same, it's not illegal and it's not assault even though they're not allowed to use it. That's the point. C'man... I know you can see this.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

This is a false parallel. Bouncers cannot legally initiate the use of force.

Can the NYPD place you in a chokehold? Yes or no answer.

The police can. Assuming the patron didn't throw the first punch the bouncers - even if it's a 1 on 1 - are mostly likely guilty. The police are most likely not.

And that's kind of the point. This case highlights the inconsistencies in how the police are treated and seen. If a bouncer had done the same to a patron they felt threatened them, it would be assault - cut and clear case. Yet a badge makes a difference in this case. Why?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

I posted this in another thread long ago, before this issue came up. So I'm being redundant, but it relates somewhat to specifically why they stopped him in the first place for the cigs.

My BIL, the now retired NYPD cop, at one time was a Transit Cop in the Bronx, when Transit was a separate unit. He said at the start of every shift the first thing he and his partner did was go down and grab the first turnstile jumper they saw, not because jumping turnstiles is a horrible crime, but because much of the time they were lucky when they brought the perp into the station, and they come to find there were outstanding arrest warrants for the perp. They couldn't and didn't just randomly go after men on the street but instead used petty crime to (hopefully) uncover that there was something bigger there.

I talked to him last night about the Garner case, and he reminded me of that. Of course he doesn't know all the facts anymore than we do, but he said the cig collar was more than likely intended to play out just as his collars used to.

Collaterally but related to the story, his opinion as a retired NYPD Sergeant is that the cop here was wrong because he used that chokehold which was specifically prohibited by the NYPD. His bigger question is why the people who were on the GJ, who are normal citizens and not cops, didn't at least look at the video and say "This requires further scrutiny", which is what they were supposed to do. He didn't know if the guy would actually be convicted in trial or not, but that would be a reasonable decision on their part, assuming they saw the video.

That's my 2 cents, for all it's worth.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Eh, the last time I talked to you in this thread I didn't attribute anything to you...



If all that changes is physical setting and the characters, the chokehold is considered part of an assault and illegal action. If the setting stays the same, it's not illegal and it's not assault even though they're not allowed to use it. That's the point. C'man... I know you can see this.

Yes you did. Here is a post I made to you 2 days ago where you did the same thing.

Huh? I don't think you've read my posts in this thread my friend. I didn't say that the cop is not culpable of something here. I don't really care about the bootleg cigs. I asked what the charges were the GJ was supposed to consider, that's all. I asked because I don't know. I know what the Ferguson GJ was asked to consider.

My husband just said this cop was suspended without pay in July according to everything he's heard on the news and read on the net?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Can the NYPD place you in a chokehold? Yes or no answer.



And that's kind of the point. This case highlights the inconsistencies in how the police are treated and seen. If a bouncer had done the same to a patron they felt threatened them, it would be assault - cut and clear case. Yet a badge makes a difference in this case. Why?



There are no laws in the State of New York prohibiting the police from using a choke-hold though there are in other jurisdictions. As a matter of policy the NYPD prohibits the use. So the answer would be no they cannot. However because it isn't illegal for them to use one a criminal proceeding based solely on the choke-hold will go nowhere. It becomes an NYPD administrative issue and the most the NYPD can do is fire the guy and possibly take action against his pension. That's it.

Of course the family can, and should, and will, bring a civil action, but that's against the city - the taxpayers - and not the cop. The NYPD pays a hundred million or so a year to settle civil cases against it. If for no other reason the people should be screaming for change because of that alone.


Of course the police are treated differently. They ultimately cannot do their job if they can't force compliance with their legal orders. That doesn't mean that force should be first resort as it was here. It should be
the last resort.
 
Last edited:
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Yes you did. Here is a post I made to you 2 days ago where you did the same thing.

Eh: Here is the post I made:

The fact that the GJ didn't even so much as bring forward a manslaughter charge shows that it wasn't considered. C'mon tres. You can't be blind to what happened here. Police tried to arrest a guy for selling bootleg cigarettes. He was handled in a way banned by the NYPD. There was no evidence he was selling bootleg cigarettes. Guy is now dead and a ****ty police officer is probably on paid leave.

I didn't attribute anything to you. I simply said you may not be seeing what happened here if you thought the jury had considered manslaughter. Then I thanked you for stating that you were opened to possibility that police were in the wrong. That's not attributing anything.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

There are no laws in the State of New York prohibiting the police from using a choke-hold though there are in other jurisdictions. As a matter of policy the NYPD prohibits the use. So the answer would be no they cannot. However because it isn't illegal for them to use one a criminal proceeding based solely on the choke-hold will go nowhere. It becomes an NYPD administrative issue and the most the NYPD can do is fire the guy and possibly take action against his pension. That's it.

Of course the family, and should, and will, bring a civil action, but that's against the city - the taxpayers - and not the cop. The NYPD pays a hundred million or so a year to settle civil cases against it. If for no other reason the people should be screaming for change because of that alone.


Of course the police are treated differently. They ultimately cannot do their job if they can't force compliance with their legal orders. That doesn't mean that force should be first resort as it was here. It should be
the last resort.

As a matter of policy the NYPD prohibits the use. So the answer would be no they cannot. However because it isn't illegal for them to use one a criminal proceeding based solely on the choke-hold will go nowhere.

Therein lies the technical accuracy of the situation. I personally think a chokehold is terrible, and they shouldn't use it for a reason. But from a legal perspective, it isn't illegal. It's a policy issue. The NYPD should release him from any additional affiliation with them for breaking their policy which according to my BIL is something that the cop as well as the other cops should have known by second nature.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Eh: Here is the post I made:



I didn't attribute anything to you. I simply said you may not be seeing what happened here if you thought the jury had considered manslaughter. Then I thanked you for stating that you were opened to possibility that police were in the wrong. That's not attributing anything.

I don't think you read your posts again. You made claims in both of them that I didn't think the cops did anything wrong, and my posts say something completely different. You even brought Libertarianism into this somehow. This isn't a Libertarian/Republican/Democrat issue for me. My political lean is irrelevant. This is about what the GJ saw, what the tape shows, and whether the cop committed a crime (not a blatant disregard for his employer's policy).
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

As a matter of policy the NYPD prohibits the use. So the answer would be no they cannot. However because it isn't illegal for them to use one a criminal proceeding based solely on the choke-hold will go nowhere.

Therein lies the technical accuracy of the situation. I personally think a chokehold is terrible, and they shouldn't use it for a reason. But from a legal perspective, it isn't illegal. It's a policy issue. The NYPD should release him from any additional affiliation with them for breaking their policy which according to my BIL is something that the cop as well as the other cops should have known by second nature.

I agree completely. As does my brother who's a retired NYPD Sgt.
 
Back
Top Bottom