Total Posts:27|Showing Posts:1-27
Jump to topic:

Eric Garner death, no Indictment

mortsdor
Posts: 1,181
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2014 12:28:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
https://www.youtube.com...

Not sure on all the evidence, but here's my take:

Garner resisted arrest... sure.
However, he did not seem to be threatening violence whatsoever.

the chokehold is a banned practice by the NYPD, that is officers are instructed to Not use it as a means of establishing control, and I'm pretty sure it was listed in the Autopsy as a contributing factor to the cause of death.

this situation did not appear to demand such an immediate, and overwhelming use of force for any reason whatsoever...
More police were approaching, and Garner had not shown any signs that he was aggressive or was going to resist Violently...

Until/unless he seemed like he was going to be aggressive or try to run, there wasn't any need to lunge for his neck.
Chances are once he was surrounded by the greater number of officers that were approaching, he'd have cooperated eventually if they stayed calm and were adamant that they were bringing him in.

and even if he didn't they could've tried means of a less-violent takedown/method of control
I cannot understand why there was no indictment.

Also it should be made clear just what evidence there was against him in the particular situation, and whether they had probable cause sufficient for an arrest and possible conviction.

If there was no such evidence of probable cause then the arrest would be illegal and improper and his death would be unambiguously criminal and not only should the police be indicted, but they should be convicted.
gnbutler3535
Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/6/2014 12:57:04 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
first of all id like to offer my condolences to the garner family, I am truly sorry, your in my prayers.
This was truly a horrible tragedy, however we should not be so quick to call all police officers racist and violent. I am aware of the statistics regarding black men and officer shootings. I understand that white men are also shot and killed by police as well. these police officers are literally putting there lives on the line each and every time they head into work. Daily, police officers have guns drawn on them during routine traffic stops, responding to domestic calls and crimes in progress. Regarding the eric garner case. These police officers did not think for a minute about needing to use deadly force, they didn't even want to have to put hands on the man, the fact of the matter Is he refused to comply with these officers peacefully.He made it clear he would not be complying or leaving the scene without being forced to , what you don't see in the brief video clip is the 15 plus minutes the officers spent verbally directing him to please surrender. Unfortunately he chose not to , in my belief the combination of the physical altercation his weight and health led to cardiac arrest. The last thing the officers wanted , intended, tried to do was kill this man. The police officers were simply responding to a call from other business owners who legally make a living and tried to resolve this issue peacefully. The fact that the situation rose to a level of requiring officers to use routine restraint and ultimately resulted in a mans life being lost was a horrifying incomprehensible accident which breaks all of our hearts. There was a reason why this man was not indicted by a grand jury and I believe when all the facts come out more will agree with this statement
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 11:12:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
How many times does one have to be arrested in order for one to come to the conclusion that person has complete and total contempt for the law? 10-15-20-25-30 times

Eric Garner has been arrested 31 times. And I thought I was trouble when I was a young punk.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 11:15:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
How is it that a person can still be free and not in prison after being arrested 31 times. Multiple times for the same offense.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
headphonegut
Posts: 4,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/9/2014 11:41:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/6/2014 12:57:04 AM, gnbutler3535 wrote:
stuff

I don't think they browse this site no offense. I mean keep on man. But speaking to them as if they were here then tooling on them is kinda lolque??
crying to soldiers coming home to their dogs why do I torment myself with these videos?
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,249
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/11/2014 10:33:30 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/9/2014 11:15:12 PM, sadolite wrote:
How is it that a person can still be free and not in prison after being arrested 31 times. Multiple times for the same offense.

Black angels.
slo1
Posts: 4,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2014 1:34:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I know right. How exactly can a guy sell cigarettes to homeless people without paying the sales taxes to the state and not be in prison.
ZenoCitium
Posts: 184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/12/2014 9:41:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I think gnbutler makes some good points. Especially that this was a tragedy. In the end a man lost his life. However, it seems like a great majority ignore that most of the responsibility for the outcome in this horrible accident was due to the direct actions of the victim. I don't know a lot of the details, but I did read that the victim was still breathing when emergency services arrived. I am curious about what was included in the autopsy report. The choke hold may not have been a direct cause. It conceivably was his weight and other health factors.

I am wondering about a few things. Maybe someone can enlighten me. For one, why is this a race issue? I don't think that in the Garner case or the Furgeson case race played any part in the incident. Could someone explain how race was interjected into these cases?

Also, does anyone else notice the blatant disregard the media has to providing an accurate story. For instance, in the Garner case they misdirect most to believe he suffocated when in reality he died from a heart attack. News reports say he was killed for cigarettes. In reality, cigarettes are probably more to blame than the officers involved. In the Furgeson case the victim is always described as an unarmed teenage boy and that he was on "the right path". In reality, he is a 6'-4" 300 lb man. I'm sure by right path they did not mean beating and stealing from an elderly store clerc or smoking illegal substances or attacking a police officer in an attempt to get his weapon and then running at the officer "full charge". The media: " Police just executed an unarmed 17 year old in the street." I don't understand. It seems like a more appropriate headline would be "Robbery suspect fleeing at first, attacks and charges police officer, was killed."
phiLockeraptor
Posts: 233
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/13/2014 4:28:31 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Here's a clip that sums it up best:

https://www.youtube.com...
"Philosophy is a great conversation that never ends"

Writing for this website ----> www.dailyfreethinker.com
ZenoCitium
Posts: 184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/14/2014 8:32:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I do like The Daily Show and Jon Stewart. I think he provides an introspective view for America. However, he did report on this incident very early and before some of the details were public. I agree, unlike the Ferguson case this was more cut and dry. However, the true still remains that he resisted arrest and his fighting gave him a heart attack. It's a tragedy and I have no doubt that the officers will carry the guilt of their indirect involvement for the rest of their lives.
PeacefulChaos
Posts: 2,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/17/2014 11:17:04 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I believe that the officer(s) should have been indicted.

Did Garner resist arrest? Yes, but in a very non-threatening way. He stated "Don't touch me," which he has the right to say; however, the only thing he did that is objectionable is moving his hands away from the officers when they tried to handcuff him. He did not try to flee or harm them, he just moved his hands away. As Jon Stewart pointed out, there have been numerous instances in which suspects resist arrest in a very similar fashion, but there is no problem; however, in this case, the officers completely overreacted. Simply because Garner moved his hands away, they decided to do a banned chokehold on him and, using the combined weight of several officers, tackle him to the ground and handcuff him.

Afterwards, he states multiple times in a clearly distressed voice "I can't breathe." The officers' response was to continue applying pressure on his chest and neck, despite the fact that he's clearly not going anywhere. They had just handcuffed him and he was on the ground, so there was no need to continue applying pressure. Later, the autopsy would indicate that he died due to pressure applied to the chest and neck. Does it make sense to continue applying pressure to someone's chest/neck after they've stated multiple times in a distressed voice that they cannot breathe?

It is quite obvious that the officers reacted inappropriately based on this evidence, and I see no reason as to why they weren't indicted. Indictment only means that they will hold a trial for the officers, but not even a trial will be held for their inappropriate behavior that led to the death of Eric Garner.

As for racial matters, I don't know if that affected the event. Maybe it did, maybe it didn't. But just from evaluating the incident, I feel as though the officers should have been indicted.
TheINFJNala
Posts: 47
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/21/2014 9:28:04 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
If any thinks that this wasn't murder, then you are too stupid for me to comprehend. It shows it in the video!

He kept saying he couldn't breathe, and what did they do? Let him suffocate!

If they had just let him get some air by not applying so much pressure on his chest, then this would not have been a huge issue.

And for those who say you can't talk if you can't breathe, WTF? Whenever you talk, you don't breathe! You can't breathe and talk at the same time!!!! IDIOTS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ZenoCitium
Posts: 184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/27/2014 3:09:43 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
@PeacefulChaos:

New York law doesn't differentiate between violent and non-violent resisting arrest. The video doesn't capture the entire ordeal. The officers gave him many, many chances to comply. In your opinion, exactly what should the officers have done?

The chokehold was prohibited by the NY police but it is not illegal. This case sparked new legal action to make a police chokehold illegal. However, even the mayor of NYC has voiced his disapproval of this measure. The police maintain that a headlock was used, not a chokehold. I'm not sure if this is true but it does seem feasible. The coroner's report noted that there was no damage to Garners neck or windpipe and the police reported that he was breathing even as the ambulance arrived. The EMTs also maintain that he was breathing and did not perform CPR or even rush him on the stretcher. I believe he died an hr later of a heart attack. The report also attributes his death to poor health. He was obese and he had asma and heart disease.

There will be no trial because the judge and jurry found that there was not enough evidence to indict. This is a protection granted by the constitution.

@TheINFJNala:

I can usually determine someones level of intelligence by how quickly they call someone else, that they barely know, stupid. You are a frontrunner in that race, my friend. I'll give you a second chance to provide a thoughtful and meaningful response. Its sad what happened to Garner but I don't think either officer was reaponsible. Keep in mind that yells of "I can't breathe" or "you're going to break my arm" etc are pretty common when a criminal is resisting arrest. It was clearly an accident and the grand jury felt the same after reviewing tons more information that any of us. The bottom line is that Garner and Brown would still be alive if they had not resisted arrest.

I'm still curious if there is a good answer out there, why this has been designates a racially motivated homicide?
light_strike
Posts: 4
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2015 9:42:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/27/2014 3:09:43 PM, ZenoCitium wrote:
I'm still curious if there is a good answer out there, why this has been designates a racially amotivated homicide?

Its considered racially motivated because a white person killed a black person. I personally disagree with that designation but thats all their is to it.

However you said something else that is bothering me. "If Brown or Gardner hadn't resisted arrest they would still be alive." This is victim blaming at the highest degree. Should both of them have complied with the officers orders. Yes. Is resisting arrest punishable by death? No.
KhaosMage
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2015 10:10:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/1/2015 9:42:45 PM, light_strike wrote:

Is resisting arrest punishable by death? No.

Since when is a choke hold considered lethal force?
ZenoCitium
Posts: 184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2015 10:24:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/1/2015 10:10:23 PM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 1/1/2015 9:42:45 PM, light_strike wrote:

Is resisting arrest punishable by death? No.

Since when is a choke hold considered lethal force?

Yes, and that is one of the main arguments in this case. For the officers involved to have been indited, the prosecution was required to prove that they had intent to harm or gross disregard for well being. They failed to provide that evidence. The officers could not possibly forsee the victim having a heart attack during the struggle.
ZenoCitium
Posts: 184
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/1/2015 10:49:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/1/2015 9:42:45 PM, light_strike wrote:
At 12/27/2014 3:09:43 PM, ZenoCitium wrote:

Its considered racially motivated because a white person killed a black person. I personally disagree with that designation but thats all their is to it

So when a black person kills a white person, is that racially motivated? Did you know that black on white crime, including homicides, are more prevalent than white on black crimes? It seems to me that people make it "racially motivated" by doing what you have just done. "[That's] all [there] is to it." That's an argument of force or a argument of popularity. Just because everyone thinks in that way doesn't make it true. The irony is that this thought process is actually the racial motivation that you/they are searching for.
KhaosMage
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2015 9:40:06 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/1/2015 10:24:17 PM, ZenoCitium wrote:
At 1/1/2015 10:10:23 PM, KhaosMage wrote:
At 1/1/2015 9:42:45 PM, light_strike wrote:

Is resisting arrest punishable by death? No.

Since when is a choke hold considered lethal force?

Yes, and that is one of the main arguments in this case. For the officers involved to have been indited, the prosecution was required to prove that they had intent to harm or gross disregard for well being. They failed to provide that evidence. The officers could not possibly forsee the victim having a heart attack during the struggle.

While your last sentence is likely true, you are wrong because the officers did have intent. You don't have to intend to kill to be charged with manslaughter, just an intent to act and cause the chain of events that lead to the death to occur.
If he was not a cop, I do believe there would have been a charge.

He was resisting arrest. The fact that is was peaceful is irrelevant. Force was authorized, so the issue, to me, is the level of force (which this was excessive) vs. the liklihood of death.
Since a choke hold is not lethal force, I do not believe it is criminal. If this was an average citizen, it would be, because they have no reason to use force on Garner (i.e. assault/battery).
light_strike
Posts: 4
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2015 10:45:04 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
First off, I'm sorry for the grammar and spelling mistakes, I typed that on a phone with a small keyboard.

I guess I didn't make it clear in my last post but I do NOT believe that the death of Eric Garner was racially motivated. However, I do believe that the chokehold used by the police officer was excessive force. Garner was not putting anybody in danger. He did not pull out a weapon and threaten officers with it. Officer Pantaleo had no obvious reason to act as he did.
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2015 11:17:51 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/21/2014 9:28:04 PM, TheINFJNala wrote:
If any thinks that this wasn't murder, then you are too stupid for me to comprehend. It shows it in the video!

He kept saying he couldn't breathe, and what did they do? Let him suffocate!

If they had just let him get some air by not applying so much pressure on his chest, then this would not have been a huge issue.

And for those who say you can't talk if you can't breathe, WTF? Whenever you talk, you don't breathe! You can't breathe and talk at the same time!!!! IDIOTS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How many times was he given the chance to avoid what killed him.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
KhaosMage
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2015 12:32:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/2/2015 10:45:04 AM, light_strike wrote:
However, I do believe that the chokehold used by the police officer was excessive force. Garner was not putting anybody in danger. He did not pull out a weapon and threaten officers with it. Officer Pantaleo had no obvious reason to act as he did.

I agree with you.
However, do you agree that a choke hold is not lethal force?
Do you agree that some amount of force was appropriate given his clear intention of resisting arrest?

If you agree with this, then tell me what you think should happen if the officer tazed a suspect (who deserved it), and the suspect had a seizure and died? Is that, also, murder?
Arminius
Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2015 5:44:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/4/2014 12:28:37 PM, mortsdor wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

Not sure on all the evidence, but here's my take:

Garner resisted arrest... sure.
However, he did not seem to be threatening violence whatsoever.

the chokehold is a banned practice by the NYPD, that is officers are instructed to Not use it as a means of establishing control, and I'm pretty sure it was listed in the Autopsy as a contributing factor to the cause of death...

It was a submission hold, not a chokehold. The autopsy showed no issues with his windpipe. The officer followed his training. The issue is with the nanny state control freaks meddling where they don't belong. Idiot laws produce senseless tragedies.
PeacefulChaos
Posts: 2,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2015 7:01:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/27/2014 3:09:43 PM, ZenoCitium wrote:

New York law doesn't differentiate between violent and non-violent resisting arrest. The video doesn't capture the entire ordeal.

The point of me saying that it was a non-violent resist of arrest is to demonstrate the degree of excessive force that the police used on the man. There have been other cases in which individuals resist arrest somewhat more forcefully, but no one ends up dying. That is because the cops did their job poorly in this case.

The officers gave him many, many chances to comply. In your opinion, exactly what should the officers have done?

They should have grabbed his hands, force his hands behind his back, and handcuff him. If he grew violent, more force would be necessary.

Shoving him to the ground with 4 or 5 officers and using a banned chokehold is not appropriate. It is also excessive force to continuing apply the weight of several officers on the man's body, especially when the man is saying in a distressed voice "I can't breathe, I can't breathe." There was absolutely no need for any of that, not mentioning the fact that he was already captured and didn't have anywhere to go.

The chokehold was prohibited by the NY police but it is not illegal.

I am aware of this; however, the fact that the cop performed a banned chokehold (which led to the death of another individual) should be a sign that he can't perform his job properly if he has to resort to something that he was explicitly told not to do when the situation does not call for it in the slightest.

The police maintain that a headlock was used, not a chokehold. I'm not sure if this is true but it does seem feasible. The coroner's report noted that there was no damage to Garners neck or windpipe and the police reported that he was breathing even as the ambulance arrived.

It is to my understanding that the report stated that he died due to compression of the neck and chest, though there was no damage to the windpipe. I got this information from Wikipedia; however, it cited two other sources that state the same thing. There are four additional sources (some dealing with medical examiners) that state it was a chokehold, not a headlock.

The EMTs also maintain that he was breathing and did not perform CPR or even rush him on the stretcher. I believe he died an hr later of a heart attack. The report also attributes his death to poor health. He was obese and he had asma and heart disease.

The EMTs did their job rather poorly to my understanding and were suspended for a period of time, but I think what you say is true that he died later.
light_strike
Posts: 4
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2015 9:08:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I do agree that a choke hold is not lethal force. I also agree that a limited amount of force was necessary. He was clearly not in very good shape, and could have been arrested with very little physical action.

If the tazing was DESERVED (the suspect was running, fighting back, endangering somebody else) and the suspect had a seizure I dont believe the officer would be guilty of murder. The key word in that sentence was DESERVED.
mortsdor
Posts: 1,181
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/2/2015 10:43:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 1/2/2015 5:44:34 PM, Arminius wrote:
At 12/4/2014 12:28:37 PM, mortsdor wrote:
https://www.youtube.com...

Not sure on all the evidence, but here's my take:

Garner resisted arrest... sure.
However, he did not seem to be threatening violence whatsoever.

the chokehold is a banned practice by the NYPD, that is officers are instructed to Not use it as a means of establishing control, and I'm pretty sure it was listed in the Autopsy as a contributing factor to the cause of death...

It was a submission hold, not a chokehold. The autopsy showed no issues with his windpipe. The officer followed his training. The issue is with the nanny state control freaks meddling where they don't belong. Idiot laws produce senseless tragedies.

You needn't collapse someone's windpipe to restrict airflow or even strangle a person..

That said, contributing factor =/= sole cause
cathrynvclark
Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2015 8:09:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
All of these deaths of African American men shot by white police officers are no coincidence. I don't know how long America's WHITE citizens can deny the fact that we discriminate and condemn others on no other basis other than their race. Yes, I understand that Eric Garner was selling illegal cigarettes and that he also resisted arrest but those things are not punishable by death. There is video evidence of Eric saying "i can't breathe" and being choked to death by that police officer yet the officer walked free and Eric's family is left alone to their grief. The riots that follow rulings like this will eventually take it's toll on our country.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,804
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2015 2:20:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 12/27/2014 3:09:43 PM, ZenoCitium wrote:
@PeacefulChaos:

New York law doesn't differentiate between violent and non-violent resisting arrest. The video doesn't capture the entire ordeal. The officers gave him many, many chances to comply. In your opinion, exactly what should the officers have done?

The chokehold was prohibited by the NY police but it is not illegal. This case sparked new legal action to make a police chokehold illegal. However, even the mayor of NYC has voiced his disapproval of this measure. The police maintain that a headlock was used, not a chokehold. I'm not sure if this is true but it does seem feasible. The coroner's report noted that there was no damage to Garners neck or windpipe and the police reported that he was breathing even as the ambulance arrived. The EMTs also maintain that he was breathing and did not perform CPR or even rush him on the stretcher. I believe he died an hr later of a heart attack. The report also attributes his death to poor health. He was obese and he had asma and heart disease.

There will be no trial because the judge and jurry found that there was not enough evidence to indict. This is a protection granted by the constitution.

@TheINFJNala:

I can usually determine someones level of intelligence by how quickly they call someone else, that they barely know, stupid. You are a frontrunner in that race, my friend. I'll give you a second chance to provide a thoughtful and meaningful response. Its sad what happened to Garner but I don't think either officer was reaponsible. Keep in mind that yells of "I can't breathe" or "you're going to break my arm" etc are pretty common when a criminal is resisting arrest. It was clearly an accident and the grand jury felt the same after reviewing tons more information that any of us. The bottom line is that Garner and Brown would still be alive if they had not resisted arrest.

I'm still curious if there is a good answer out there, why this has been designates a racially motivated homicide?

great post worth quoting, to add, if you aren't going to enforce laws than take them off the books, it wasn't a violent crime, but if you let him walk away where do you draw the line of when to use force to arrest and when do you just let the person walk away? Without the ability to enforce a law, that law is moot. Doesn't matter if it's violent or not.
Criminals will say all sorts of things, the prisons are filled with innocent people just ask them. Hold your breath or totally exhale (so you can't breathe) then try to talk. Why did it become a racial issue? Because it makes for great news. We can't blame people for their actions and they can't take responsibility or blame for what happened so we need to look for other reasons.