• 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

Lutherf said:
So let's assume that they did? Even when the suspect has an extensive history of EXACTLY what he was accused of doing?

Look, that kind of disagreement is why there needed to be an investigation and if Garner had allowed that investigation to happen he likely wouldn't have been restrained. It's just that simple. If he REALLY thought that the cops were harassing him all he had to do was let things go, get names of the cops and find a lawyer to help him sue for harassment.
Click to expand...

Greetings, Lutherf. :2wave:

I guess the media has been told to show us that people are being targeted by the police, even though all concerned have broken the law in some way, or the police would not be involved. Why the big push to demonize policemen now? They're still the ones I would call if I have someone trying to break into my house, and I'm glad they're just a phone call away, but then I'm not out causing problems either! It will be interesting to see what decision will be reached in this case, since this man died as a result of the way he was handled. Would a stun gun have caused the same result?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Moot said:
The video was kind of blurry, but Gardner never seemed to close his fists or take a swing in self defense the entire time, not even while he was being taken down or struggling for his last breath. He was a big man, why didn't he fight back? I can only think he might have been more afraid of getting shot full of holes than pummeled.

Something is amiss when %99.999(?) of all GJ cases get an indictment but the one that has video evidence clearly showing an illegal choke hold resulting in death and witnessed by millions doesn't??? Yes, it's very hard to believe.
Click to expand...

Heya Moot.
hat.gif
Its not illegal with the law to use a choke hold and not if an officer thought his life was in danger.

Also, in the video Garner raises his hand and slightly pushes the officer back or to hold him up.


3.jpg


Officers Move In

Two officers move to arrest him. Mr. Garner pulls his hands away, again raising the question of resistance. The difference in size between the officers and Mr. Garner is apparent.

Legal issues : Whether Officer Pantaleo felt his life was threatened could also be an issue in whether he acted criminally. If the grand jury viewed Officer Pantaleo’s actions as self-defense, then there would be no crime, said Eugene O'Donnell, a former police officer and professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice.

Officer Pantaleo Officer Pantaleo said he became fearful when he was wedged between Mr. Garner and the plate glass window of a storefront and felt it buckle.....snip~
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

roguenuke said:
His actions and words showed that he believed he was being placed under arrest, by the police, even if he didn't believe he should have been. There is no question there, no ambiguity or question about what is happening, especially during the actual resistance.
Click to expand...

Point to the time in the video when he was told he was under arrest?

I've asked this many times - and not ONE person raging "he was resisting arrest!" has ever done so.

What I see is one officer jumped on his back with a chock hold from behind while another officer distracted him by poking at his chest and reaching towards his arm.

WHERE IN THE TAPE WAS HE TOLD "YOU ARE UNDER ARREST?"
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

joko104 said:
You should repeat this excellent message now and then.
Click to expand...

Thanks. As a side note, the technique is samed after an English criminal named "Burke", who perfected it.

jmotivator said:
Oh bulls***. First off, Gardener didn't die of shock. Second, anyone who would go in to fatal circulatory shock after a 2 second choke would likely not be standing on a street corner. The amount of cellular oxygen deprivation needed as a prerequisite to start a cascading lethal shock to the system after only 2 seconds of chocking would need to be so pervasive that the person would be non-functional even before the choking.
Click to expand...

No, not shock, and not choking. My bet is that he was accidently "Burked"

Basically, the persons air supply is cut off (choke hold) and then somebody else sits on his chest, and thus compresses it. Evidently, a person is poor physical condition like Garner does not need to be "Burked" very long to kill him.

As a side note, this casino heir (and heroin addict- short "Burking" time, no defensive marks from a long struggle) was murdered by the technique http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/ted-binion It took the coroner along time to figure out what happened.
 
Last edited:
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

joko104 said:
Point to the time in the video when he was told he was under arrest?

I've asked this many times - and not ONE person raging "he was resisting arrest!" has ever done so.

What I see is one officer jumped on his back with a chock hold from behind while another officer distracted him by poking at his chest and reaching towards his arm.

WHERE IN THE TAPE WAS HE TOLD "YOU ARE UNDER ARREST?"
Click to expand...

BEFORE THE TAPE BEGINS. Can you see it now?

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

Lutherf said:
He was suspected of selling loosies. The cops believed that they witnessed a criminal act committed by an individual known to have a history of such acts. Their intent and their responsibility was to investigate. The suspect intentionally, willfully and actively resisted and impeded that investigation. That resistance warranted physical restraint by the officers. Their efforts to restrain the suspect were consistent with basic use of force doctrine and were not overly aggressive but, unfortunately, lead to the death of the suspect.
Click to expand...
Incorrect.

The officers were NOT using acceptable methods of restraint. The NYPD barred the use of choke holds in 1993, for this very reason.

Eric Garner refused to cooperate with a single officer. When backup arrived, all Mr Garner did was wave his hands and say "don't touch me." He did not touch any of the officers, he was not armed, he was not hostile. While the first officer was trying to grab his hands, a second officer was behind him, went straight for his neck, threw him onto the ground, and maintained the choke hold while 5 officers restrained him. The officer released his neck, while another sat on his back, and Mr Garner complained "I can't breathe."

Resisting arrest is not a capital crime.
 
Last edited:
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

joko104 said:
Point to the time in the video when he was told he was under arrest?

I've asked this many times - and not ONE person raging "he was resisting arrest!" has ever done so.

What I see is one officer jumped on his back with a chock hold from behind while another officer distracted him by poking at his chest and reaching towards his arm.

WHERE IN THE TAPE WAS HE TOLD "YOU ARE UNDER ARREST?"
Click to expand...

Where have I said that this is in the video? No, I'm arguing that a) they didn't have to given the circumstances but b) it is possible they told him they were arresting him prior to the start of the video. We don't know. But he obviously "knew" he was being arrested.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Hatuey said:
So... if they have not obligation to tell you that you're under arrest.... how is a person still guilty of resisting something they didn't know they were under? If police are not under obligation to tell a person they're under arrest, isn't a resistance to arrest just self defense? Genuine question.
Click to expand...

I guess if while we are walking down the street, any police officer can simply walk over and grab us. Then we are supposed to instantly freeze and allow ourselves to be man-handled or be thrown down and choked to death. :roll:
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

roguenuke said:
His actions and words showed that he believed he was being placed under arrest,
Click to expand...

Ummm, no - his actions and words show he believed he believed he was being harassed. These are his words:

B3-e9GwCEAAKO9Y.png


by the police, even if he didn't believe he should have been. There is no question there, no ambiguity or question about what is happening, especially during the actual resistance.
Click to expand...

Shoulda-coulda-woulda doesn't change the question I asked you: If a cop is under no responsibility to warn a person that they're being placed under arrest, do civilians have a right to defend themselves if they feel they're being assaulted?

If yes, then Eric Garner's actions can also take the dimension that he resisted what he believed to be an assault.
If no, then you officially make it clear that civilians do not have a right to defend themselves from police action which they feel places them in harm's way.

No only is the answer that goes with "no" absolutely draconian, it basically gives police officers carte blanche to ignore an American's civil rights.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

clownboy said:
There's really no need to go there with all the imagined scenarios. That's not what happened here. He announced his intent to resist arrest before they even touched him. the 32cd time being arrested was just too much for him.
Click to expand...

Another truly desperate message by a police groupie.

Now it isn't that he WAS resisting arrest, rather he "announced his intent to resist arrest." :doh

Thus, in your opinion, police can chock anyone, throw anyone to the concrete, shove the person's head into the concrete and crush anyone - because the person may be going to resist arrest?

I suppose, if you really, really tried you could find some reasoning more ridiculous, but it will take some effort.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Hatuey said:
Ummm, no - his actions and words show he believed he believed he was being harassed. These are his words:

B3-e9GwCEAAKO9Y.png




Shoulda-coulda-woulda doesn't change the question I asked you: If a cop is under no responsibility to warn a person that they're being placed under arrest, do civilians have a right to defend themselves if they feel they're being assaulted?

If yes, then Eric Garner's actions can also take the dimension that he resisted what he believed to be an assault.
If no, then you officially make it clear that civilians do not have a right to defend themselves from police action which they feel places them in harm's way.

No only is the answer that goes with "no" absolutely draconian, it basically gives police officers carte blanche to ignore an American's civil rights.
Click to expand...


Once again, there is no "you're under arrest" or "put your hands behind your back" or anything like it. Nor at any time was he told he is being detained in any way.

Rather, he was violently assaulted from behind while another officer - and then still another - also attacked/assaulted him. At no time has he indicated any threat to the officers or any attempt to flee.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Texmex said:
I guess if while we are walking down the street, any police officer can simply walk over and grab us. Then we are supposed to instantly freeze and allow ourselves to be man-handled or be thrown down and choked to death. :roll:
Click to expand...

Then we get to hear about how they saw something. :lamo
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Visbek said:
Incorrect.

The officers were NOT using acceptable methods of restraint. The NYPD barred the use of choke holds in 1993, for this very reason.

Eric Gardner refused to cooperate with a single officer. When backup arrived, all Mr Gardner did was wave his hands and say "don't touch me." He did not touch any of the officers, he was not armed, he was not hostile. While the first officer was trying to grab his hands, a second officer was behind him, went straight for his neck, threw him onto the ground, and maintained the choke hold while 5 officers restrained him. The officer released his neck, while another sat on his back, and Mr Gardner complained "I can't breathe."

Resisting arrest is not a capital crime.
Click to expand...

No, but apparently being an obese criminal on the edge of a heart attack while continuing to commit crimes is.

The officer broke no law but did break department policy. The internal police hearing for that was held until the GJ gave it's decision. I'm betting he loses his job now that the press and the ugly racists/community organizers are involved.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Cryptic said:
Maybe Garner was accidently "Burked" by the police?

"Burking" was (and on rare occasions still is) a method used by English criminals to kill somebody, with out leaving any injuries on the victim's body. In addition, even experienced coroners have difficulty establishing the true cause of death- it often looks like a heart attack.

Basically, the persons air supply is cut off (choke hold) and then somebody else sits on his chest, and thus compresses it. Evidently, a person is poor physical condition like Garner does not need to be "Burked" very long to kill him.

As a side note, this casino heir (and heroin addict- short "Burking" time, no defensive marks from a long struggle) was murdered by the technique Articles about Ted Binion - Los Angeles Times It took the coroner along time to figure out what happened.
Click to expand...

There is no doubt after the fact that the take down of Gardener lead to his death. I don't think a "burking" would be technically true because the choke hold was released once he was on the ground. I do believe that Gardener's asthma, weight and pressure of the officer on his back all contributed to Gardener's death. What I object to is the defacto claim that it was criminal behavior because Gardener died. The number of contributing physical ailments that made a 6'3" 360 man so amazingly frail could not have been known by the arresting officers.
 
Re: NYPD officer in Eric Garner chokehold death not indicted by Staten Island grand j

Hatuey said:
... Yes, I understand what it means. However, by stating the facts that A) blacks are distrustful of police and B) this is due to factual discrepancies in sentencing (which go by race) is not paraphrasing: cops are there to harass black people. I'll give you one more shot to be honest what he said and post something even remotely consistent with what you claimed he alluded to.
Click to expand...
My words are more than adequate to describe, Obama, Holder, and Al Sharpton's rhetoric.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

joko104 said:
Once again, there is no "you're under arrest" or "put your hands behind your back" or anything like it. Nor at any time was he told he is being detained in any way.

Rather, he was violently assaulted from behind while another officer - and then still another - also attacked/assaulted him. At no time has he indicated any threat to the officers or any attempt to flee.
Click to expand...

It's absolutely insane that people think that an officer approaching him from behind and putting him in a chokehold shows that he knew he was being arrested. Utter nonsense.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Hatuey said:
Ummm, no - his actions and words show he believed he believed he was being harassed. These are his words:

B3-e9GwCEAAKO9Y.png




Shoulda-coulda-woulda doesn't change the question I asked you: If a cop is under no responsibility to warn a person that they're being placed under arrest, do civilians have a right to defend themselves if they feel they're being assaulted?

If yes, then Eric Garner's actions can also take the dimension that he resisted what he believed to be an assault.
If no, then you officially make it clear that civilians do not have a right to defend themselves from police action which they feel places them in harm's way.

No only is the answer that goes with "no" absolutely draconian, it basically gives police officers carte blanche to ignore an American's civil rights.
Click to expand...

Whether you approve or not, there is no evidence they violated any of his rights in the case of not announcing he was under arrest. They can easily use the incident itself to justify not saying the words "you're under arrest", and the fact that he knew who they were. The resistance happened before the takedown, the force applied that contributed to his death. Was this even questioned during the GJ proceedings? This is seems completely silly for an argument in these circumstances.

It's like people are searching for reasons to blame the cops, rather than actually using the very relevant information from the case and questionable actions. From a reasonable person point of view, it was obvious he knew they were cops and he was possibly going to be arrested, and was resisting (although mildly).
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

joko104 said:
Another truly desperate message by a police groupie.

Now it isn't that he WAS resisting arrest, rather he "announced his intent to resist arrest." :doh

Thus, in your opinion, police can chock anyone, throw anyone to the concrete, shove the person's head into the concrete and crush anyone - because the person may be going to resist arrest?

I suppose, if you really, really tried you could find some reasoning more ridiculous, but it will take some effort.
Click to expand...

No to all of that nonsense. I first familiarized myself with the facts of the case that are published. THEN I made my own decision.
 
Re: NYPD officer in Eric Garner chokehold death not indicted by Staten Island grand j

vesper said:
My words are more than adequate to describe, Obama, Holder, and Al Sharpton's rhetoric.
Click to expand...

It's amazing to watch you go from saying: Obama said this....... to... I've interpreted what Obama said to mean this.

I don't honestly care how you feel about what Obama said, I asked you to show us where he said what you claim he said. You couldn't do it. I hear crow is kind of tough this time of year. How does it taste?
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

jmotivator said:
Oh bulls***. First off, Gardener didn't die of shock.
Click to expand...
According to the autopsy, Garner died of compression to the neck, compressions to his chest, and being held prone by the officers caused his death.

That's why the coroner's office ruled it a homicide, and it went before a grand jury.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

roguenuke said:
Whether you approve or not, there is no evidence they violated any of his rights
Click to expand...

You're being purposely obtuse and dodgy. This is actually very unlike you rogue. Answer a question: Does a person have a right to resist if they believe they're being assaulted by cops? Yes or no answer.
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

clownboy said:
No, but apparently being an obese criminal on the edge of a heart attack while continuing to commit crimes is.

The officer broke no law but did break department policy. The internal police hearing for that was held until the GJ gave it's decision. I'm betting he loses his job now that the press and the ugly racists/community organizers are involved.
Click to expand...

If he broke departmental policy and someone died as a result, why SHOULDN'T he lose his job? Bonus points if you can explain it without whining about "community organizers."
 
Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Visbek said:
According to the autopsy, Garner died of compression to the neck, compressions to his chest, and being held prone by the officers caused his death.

That's why the coroner's office ruled it a homicide, and it went before a grand jury.
Click to expand...

He also noted several other contributing factors. But he did not die of those things you listed, he died of a heart attack.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom